You are on page 1of 2

The Constitution Doesn’t Allow

Congress to Force Health Care on


People
Posted by Joel Hilliker at 9:28 pm on August 22, 2009

I n today’s Washington Post, former Department of Justice attorneys David Rivkin and Lee Casey

make an important point. The document that enumerates the powers of Congress is the Constitution.
Nowhere does it grant legislators the right to force people to get health insurance.

The federal government does not have the power to regulate Americans simply because they are
there. Significantly, in two key cases, United States v. Lopez (1995) and United States v.
Morrison (2000), the Supreme Court specifically rejected the proposition that the commerce clause
allowed Congress to regulate noneconomic activities merely because, through a chain of causal
effects, they might have an economic impact. These decisions reflect judicial recognition that the
commerce clause is not infinitely elastic and that, by enumerating its powers, the framers denied
Congress the type of general police power that is freely exercised by the states.

This leaves mandate supporters with few palatable options. Congress could attempt to condition some
federal benefit on the acquisition of insurance. States, for example, usually condition issuance of a car
registration on proof of automobile insurance, or on a sizable payment into an uninsured motorist
fund. Even this, however, cannot achieve universal health coverage. No federal program or entitlement
applies to the entire population, and it is difficult to conceive of a “benefit” that some part of the
population would not choose to eschew.

As we witness the attack on the Constitution being waged by those in power, we must acknowledge
the brilliance of the nation’s founders. They took careful steps to protect citizens against such abuses
of power—and if these lawyers are right, in this case they just may have won the day. As Rivkin and
Casey conclude,

[A]dvocates of universal health coverage must accept that Congress’s power, like that of the other
branches, has limits. These limits apply regardless of how important the issue may be, and neither
Congress nor the president can take constitutional short cuts. The genius of our system is that, no
matter how convinced our elected officials may be that certain measures are in the public interest,
their goals can be accomplished only in accord with the powers and processes the Constitution
mandates, processes that inevitably make them accountable to the American people.
Remember that, back in a radio interview in 2001, Barack Obama lamented the fact that “Generally
the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can’t do to you, says what
the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state
government must do on your behalf.”

In his Personal back in January, Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry made this comment about that
statement:

That is true, and it is a major reason the Constitution was so successful in establishing this nation. The
Ten Commandments are the same way. They are mostly “thou shalt nots,” explaining those things God
commands you not to do. That gives a law-abiding people a tremendous amount of freedom! Not only
are you free from those sins that lead to spiritual and physical slavery, but also, everything else that
does not violate that law is good in God’s sight. •

This content was printed online at: http://www.theTrumpet.com/index.php?q=6441


Copyright © 2009 Philadelphia Church of God, All Rights Reserved.

You might also like